Don't you worry it's on the agenda !
Becoming an A/W
- Thread starter KSDC
- Start date
Don't you worry it's on the agenda !
sikamalc
Administrator
Many differing views here, and that does not suprise me at all. I could add quite a bit about the present system.
There are many good professional young stalkers, having worked with one this weekend, and it is blantantly obvious that with his position he is going to be.
Waiting now for some sarky comment!!
But the fact remains that we have people with limited experience in my opinion becoming an AW just fir the sake of it.
Why should an AW have a good deer dog or access to one? I would have thought that was obvious. Are you saying that even on a Level 2 stalk that a candidate does not fu// up? Because it happens no matter how good you think you are, and if you guide enough it will happen more than you think.
There are many good professional young stalkers, having worked with one this weekend, and it is blantantly obvious that with his position he is going to be.
Waiting now for some sarky comment!!
But the fact remains that we have people with limited experience in my opinion becoming an AW just fir the sake of it.
Why should an AW have a good deer dog or access to one? I would have thought that was obvious. Are you saying that even on a Level 2 stalk that a candidate does not fu// up? Because it happens no matter how good you think you are, and if you guide enough it will happen more than you think.
Monkey Spanker
Well-Known Member
I'd agree that any stalking guide should have a deer dog or at least access to one as he will undoubtedly be dealing with a lot of inexperienced stalkers and mistakes will be made. However, an AW should not need one really as it is up to the candidate to deal with any mistakes made. The AW is purely there to observe and question as required. The AW shouldn't even carry a rifle really.
I would also argue that nobody is without access to a good deer dog now as Lee's post above shows (UKSHA).
MS
I would also argue that nobody is without access to a good deer dog now as Lee's post above shows (UKSHA).
MS
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
I am astounded at some of the responses
The DSC1/2 system is a voluntary accreditation. nothing more.
We as a community are currently being assessed from on high at our own ability to self regulate and to "up our game"
If we do not demonstrate that we are doing this the powers that be will enforce a mandatory qualification and you can imagine how that will go.
Deep into your pockets!
Despite DSC1 being held up as the minimum standard by FEO's and others, DSC2 is the bench mark that forestry companies, lease applications and anyone considered as competent to shoot deer in a paid environment should have.
The bottleneck between DSC1 and DSC2 is down to the shortage of AW's
nothing else.
The people most likely to be in a position to impact the numbers of DSC1 holders progressing to DSC2 are the stalkers doing accompanied days. Many of whom are NOT AW's
If I was doing this it would be an absolute no brainer. You are there already. its a service that you can add to your current one with no cost to you
Now if you don't like the idea of paperwork that is your problem.
But if we do not address this issue "they" will do it for us.
The DSC/AW system is not an exclusive members only club or badge of honour
its a basic qualification which at DSC1 level I struggle to understand how people fail
At level 2 if you fail someone it should be for a VERY valid reason. just because you don't like the knife they use or the colour of their antiseptic wipes!
its a driving license
a permit
a paid for badge
Get on the AW list and start cranking the handle otherwise before you know it you will be all in a classroom being lectured to by a Government official and being relieved of you hard earned to do the "New Government Approved Deer Stalkers" qualification before you can even get a deer legal calibre or get a bought day
You do not have to have shot a 1000 deer, have 10 years experience, have shot or seen all 6 species
You do need to be aware of the parameters of the ICR and be competent at evaluating an individuals ability to meet them.
That's it!!
The DSC1/2 system is a voluntary accreditation. nothing more.
We as a community are currently being assessed from on high at our own ability to self regulate and to "up our game"
If we do not demonstrate that we are doing this the powers that be will enforce a mandatory qualification and you can imagine how that will go.
Deep into your pockets!
Despite DSC1 being held up as the minimum standard by FEO's and others, DSC2 is the bench mark that forestry companies, lease applications and anyone considered as competent to shoot deer in a paid environment should have.
The bottleneck between DSC1 and DSC2 is down to the shortage of AW's
nothing else.
The people most likely to be in a position to impact the numbers of DSC1 holders progressing to DSC2 are the stalkers doing accompanied days. Many of whom are NOT AW's
If I was doing this it would be an absolute no brainer. You are there already. its a service that you can add to your current one with no cost to you
Now if you don't like the idea of paperwork that is your problem.
But if we do not address this issue "they" will do it for us.
The DSC/AW system is not an exclusive members only club or badge of honour
its a basic qualification which at DSC1 level I struggle to understand how people fail
At level 2 if you fail someone it should be for a VERY valid reason. just because you don't like the knife they use or the colour of their antiseptic wipes!
its a driving license
a permit
a paid for badge
Get on the AW list and start cranking the handle otherwise before you know it you will be all in a classroom being lectured to by a Government official and being relieved of you hard earned to do the "New Government Approved Deer Stalkers" qualification before you can even get a deer legal calibre or get a bought day
You do not have to have shot a 1000 deer, have 10 years experience, have shot or seen all 6 species
You do need to be aware of the parameters of the ICR and be competent at evaluating an individuals ability to meet them.
That's it!!
Cut+Squirt
Well-Known Member
I would agree with this.
The candidate is there to prove HIS ability.
He should be in possession of everything he usually has when out stalking, including dog if he has one.
The only thing I take on a witnessed stalk is a pen and notepad and my binoculars, as I am simply there to observe the candidate and ensure he meets the performance criteria.
If it goes wrong and im asked, my dog will be made available for any follow-ups.
devon deer stalker
Well-Known Member
Understandable but a loss to the system.
Thanks for getting me through the L2 a few years ago.
Cheers
Richard
Cut+Squirt
Well-Known Member
Lots of good points there.
Interestingly, I was told by one of the top guys at DMQ that a huge proportion of the AWs on the list had never completely even one ICR for a candidate, and many had been on the list for years.
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
further proves my point that those people do it as a badge of honour but are of no value to the system
still requires more AWs out there IMO
I agree with most of your post but just to just to pick up on a couple of points.
Trust me, there is a world of difference between taking a regular guest out and accompanying a DSC2 candidate. Just consider the timing alone, I can take a guest for a three to four hour stalk, gralloch in the field or back at the larder, finish the lardering, clean down and be away in half an hour. I can guarantee this will take even the best DSC2 candidate over an hour, often much more. Then you have at least one and a half hours paperwork to do. On top of this, taking a guest out is almost always enjoyable; taking a DSC2 candidates out is almost never enjoyable!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not running down the DSC system, far from it, I'm just trying to help people understand it from the AW's side.
It is my choice to remain involved.
To move onto your point about it being hard to fail DSC1 or 2, again, you will have to trust me but many (maybe even the majority) candidates are not presenting at the required standard. I often have to rephrase questions many times and not move when there are deer showing in the hope that the candidate will twig. I often worry that I have 'assisted' a candidate too much. If it was a scored process like a driving test with minor and major faults then a very high proportion of people would fail.
Without a doubt the biggest problem is people registering too soon before they have the confidence and experience. I'm not going to be drawn on years/numbers because everyone is different but the example that I use is this: if we had just shot five deer between us would you be able to confidently gralloch, larder and inspect two while I did the other three?
Again, I'm not trying to be critical just honest.
Thats interesting and far from ideal. I wonder how many of the AW's on the list are active.
6pointer
Well-Known Member
Again, I'm not trying to be critical just honest
Very Good post and it is time that candidates realise this is a qualification not a guided outing.
2130martin
Well-Known Member
Having only been guided a handful of times and only guided/mentored close friends for there first deer etc...............I can see why a lot of guides don't offer the AW service as there could be potential for professional embarrassment/conflict of interest.......it would take a very diplomatically skilled individual to avoid those potential holes!!........
Here's a spanner for your works - does a AW even need to stalk deer at all? All their role is to assess you against certain criteria - I'm not sure that requires personal experience. I'm not sure you need to be a stalker.
I do think that the system should have some witnessed witnessing to ensure QC. I do think that there should be a minimum requirement to remain on as an AW (5 ICRs in a 3 year period?). Not so much that a bad year gets you thrown off, but enough that you keep your hand in.
There are videos on here of AWs who are doing grallochs and I would say the food hygiene standards are shocking in some - these are demonstrations..... If I was an AW I could not pass that ICR......
I do think that the system should have some witnessed witnessing to ensure QC. I do think that there should be a minimum requirement to remain on as an AW (5 ICRs in a 3 year period?). Not so much that a bad year gets you thrown off, but enough that you keep your hand in.
There are videos on here of AWs who are doing grallochs and I would say the food hygiene standards are shocking in some - these are demonstrations..... If I was an AW I could not pass that ICR......
Monkey Spanker
Well-Known Member
Living in rural Norfolk obviously it is impossible to watch video on the internet but if, as you say, there are clips of AW's demonstrating bad practices then that is not good. Especially if they think that they are working to an acceptable standard which I assume they must otherwise they wouldn't put the video online.
bewsher500
Well-Known Member
And many aspects of this are where I don't necessarily agree
The DSC2 element IMO is based wholly on the provision of quality product into food chain. The target selection, humane killing, health and safety etc etc are secondary.
The primary concern of the industry and government is of an unregulated food source,
None of this would even exist if there was no money in the carcase or it was mostly eaten by the hunter
But as a stalker/guide if you are being paid to provide stalking AND AW services I see no benefit to you, the stalker or the system to not point out a deer the candidate may not have seen straight away if it means saving the situation from a potential lost day.
They still have to demonstrate ability at positioning, target confirmation/selection and shoot the bloody thing.
To allow a candidate to walk in and bump a deer you have seen and waste possibly the entire day/morning stalk and everyone's time involved seems to me to be so obtuse as verging on negligent. (and I am not suggesting you do or did this but merely making a point)
Tantamount to a driving instructor with dual controls allowing a test car to slam into another than has pulled out in front on them.
Don't think many instructors would sit blinding by if an accident was about to happen on the off chance that the test candidate might have it under control.
Candidates who don't shoot deer because they are noisy and blind are not a threat to either the food chain or public safety!
My issue is that you have AW's who may not have the experience to recognise the capability of the stalker and apply THEIR experience in the assessment of another stalker.
You also have on the one hand those that will require a 100% adherence to their own methods and approach within the criteria
On the other you have those that recognise there are many ways to skin a cat and so long as it matches the criteria it is fine.
6pointer
Well-Known Member
Apache. I go out with my Assessor twice a year he comes to me once a year and I go to him once a year we go out stalking and I watch him on my area and he watch's me on his. We then sit down for a chat and go over anything new or any problems that have happened over the last year. I must admit to not doing as many and I feel candidates are presenting to early. A few years back I was getting old hands who had to do it for there job. Now I seem to get fresh lads some of them think they are out to get guided in to deer and that is not the case.
6pointer
Well-Known Member
Bewsher You might be correct so I will tell you of a situation that led to a Candidate needing to do a further stalk. I went out with the candidate to do his third ICR .He spotted a group of 6 roe in the corner of a field the field dropped off in to a very steep gull and the deer moved off down this gully. The candidate asked me what way do the deer normally go if they go down there . At that I told him that it dose not matter you can only go right as there is a cliff face to our left . Carried on along the top got in to the group further up the gully and took a nice beast all done to a very high standard. That stalk was wrote off by an Assessor. I was not happy but hey I did help him!!.
So in the assessors opinion I should have let him find out for him self that there was a sharp drop.
So in the assessors opinion I should have let him find out for him self that there was a sharp drop.
Bewsher, I totally agree with you that it makes sense for the AW to point out deer that candidates haven't seen purely from an efficiency point of view but you have to remember that it is not a guided stalk. If it was just about witnessing a gralloch then it would be easy but its a Deer STALKING Certificate.
I hope by all the tooing and frowing on this topic people are starting to realise what a minefield it is and why AW's must have sufficient real world experience to find a way through it.
I don't think its fair to say that the certification process is driven primarily by food hygiene factors as the key players are Police forces and forestry companies/organisations however, after safety, I personally consider the gralloch to be the most important section of the ICR.
I can assure you that no AW would stand back and allow a hazardous or unethical shot to be taken just the same as no driving instructor would allow a crash to happen if he could possibly prevent it but equally he can't take the test for someone.
Bewsher, I totally agree with you that it makes sense for the AW to point out deer that candidates haven't seen purely from an efficiency point of view but you have to remember that it is not a guided stalk. If it was just about witnessing a gralloch then it would be easy but its a Deer STALKING Certificate.
I hope by all the tooing and frowing on this topic people are starting to realise what a minefield it is and why AW's must have sufficient real world experience to find a way through it.
I don't think its fair to say that the certification process is driven primarily by food hygiene factors as the key players are Police forces and forestry companies/organisations however, after safety, I personally consider the gralloch to be the most important section of the ICR.
I can assure you that no AW would stand back and allow a hazardous or unethical shot to be taken just the same as no driving instructor would allow a crash to happen if he could possibly prevent it but equally he can't take the test for someone.
Similar threads
